Standard 1 Aspect F

Standard 1F: Evidence shows that, by the time of program completion, candidates exhibit knowledge, skills, and abilities of professional educators appropriate to their target credential or degree, including: Dispositions and behaviors required for successful professional practice

---

Data Sources & Analysis

Data Source 1

LEE 156 assignment: Class 2 Discussion Board: Inquiry as Stance

Description of Data Source:
All candidates in the Single Subject credential program are required to take LEE 156, Content Area Literacy in the Secondary Classroom. Within the course, candidates are asked to respond to the following prompt in a discussion board post:

What are your thoughts regarding Cochran-Smith & Lytle’s (2001) concept of knowledge for practice, knowledge in practice, and knowledge of practice? (see pp. 47-56). How does “inquiry as stance” impact your conceptions of classroom practice and/or literacy? Who possesses the knowledge necessary to determine what goes on in middle and high school classrooms? This is very much still a contested terrain, and thus it is important to locate yourselves within the debate.

Perspective Captured from Data Source: Candidate/Completer/Course Instructor

Rationale for using Data Source:
Students’ responses on the assignment highlight their ability to recognize and reflect on different orientations toward teacher knowledge. The assignment invites students to locate themselves within an orientation and to problem-pose the corollaries of their location. This is a crucial aspect of successful professional practice, in which teachers come to identify as actors with agency, specialized knowledge, and epistemic privilege, rather than as passive implementers of distal curriculum and assessments. 

Analysis of Data:
First, five students from Fall 2019, Spring 2020, and Spring 2021 were randomly selected to ensure we had a representative sampling, mitigating against cherry-picking students who stood out as memorable for one reason or another. Their responses were truncated and anonymized and placed in a table to allow for analysis.

These selected responses were then analyzed qualitatively to look for emerging themes related to developing a successful professional practice

Interpretation of Data:
Students in all three semesters were eager to write about the three approaches to teacher knowledge advanced by Cochran-Smith and Lytle, and to locate themselves (as emerging teachers) within the conversation. Students wrote critically and forcefully, meeting the open-ended definition of success for this assignment. 

The themes of self-reflection, collaboration/co-construction, and continuous learning/intellectual engagement stand out in all three columns of student responses. All are extremely important dispositions for successful practice. Bulleted below are several examples of representative data I used to identify these themes:

• 2019: "It is important, as someone new to the profession of teaching, to be engaged in "new" professional development which does not focus solely on personal growth and benefit, but instead a life-long pursuit."
• 2019: "This concept is implementing teaching and being open to collaborating, debating, and thinking with others. It is learning overtime rather than basing their teaching based on concepts they have learned in school. Educators are open to understanding new perspectives and suggestions. This concept also allows for self-reflecting to create the best possible outcome for learning."
• 2020: "My initial concept of classroom practice was once I had the main teacher skills nailed down, I would be set, and teaching would be a breeze for the years to come. Obviously, my initial concept was shot down with this article talking about Inquiry as stance and that teachers need to be engaged in continued teacher education. Cochran-Smith & Lytle made it clear to me that continued collaborative teacher education will keep teachers up to date on current teaching methods, as well as giving students a better classroom experience."
• 2020: "Teacher learning is a lifelong process. Prospective and experienced teachers are constantly linking new learning experiences to existing knowledge to enhance their teaching.”
• 2021: "One needs to know the subject well, learn through reflection of practice and work as a team with other teachers."
• 2021: "[I]inquiry as a stance never really stops as long as we are teachers."

Even though these are small sample sizes taken from different course contexts (Fall 2019 was a fully online asynchronous cohort who were student teaching face-to-face; Spring 2020 was a face-to-face cohort that was moved online due to the then-new pandemic; Spring 2021 was a fully online asynchronous cohort of students attempting to navigate online student teaching during a pandemic), it is important to note that the collected data is representative of the anecdotal data that can be used to show the variety of dispositions and behaviors that are required for successful professional practice.

Data Source 2

Pre-Post Disposition Survey 

Definition of Data Source:
The Pre-Post Disposition Survey is administered to Single Subject candidates at the beginning of initial student teaching and at the end of final student teaching in order for the candidates to self-assess their professional dispositions from two viewpoints – BEFORE and AFTER participating in the program.

Perspective Captured from Data Source: Candidates/ Program Completers

Rationale for using Data Source:
The dispositions on which candidates rate themselves include: reflection, critical thinking, professional ethics, valuing diversity, collaboration, and lifelong learning. The survey allows the program to examine how candidates rate themselves and any changes in candidates’ dispositions from the beginning to the end of the program.

Specific Elements of Data Source Using:
Even though the survey measures six (6) dispositions, only the Profession Ethics category has been selected for this standard.  Under this  category  there are four sub-section questions that reflect the main disposition of PROFESSIONAL ETHICS:

• Recognizing the importance of consulting research to inform instruction for students with special needs.
• Commitment to ethical behavior conduct, turning assignments in on time, being punctual and reliable in attendance, and maintaining a professional appearance
• Utilizing positive behavioral supports when managing student behavior.
• Advocating for students and encouraging student self-advocacy while utilizing non-biased assessments

Definition of Success for Each Element:  
Programmatically, our goal is for all candidates to show growth in how they rate themselves related to each disposition across the two survey administrations (pre & post). 

Table 1: Frequencies and Means of Candidates’ Ratings on Disposition Areas at the Beginning and End of the Program

Link to Full Dataset (Google spreadsheets):  

• Cohort 1 (Fall 2019-Spring 2020) 
• Cohort 2 (Spring 2020-Fall 2020) 
• Cohort 3 (Fall 2020-Spring 2021)

Interpretation of Data:
Programmatically, our goal is for candidates to demonstrate growth on each of the key dispositions between when they begin the program and when they end the program. Looking at the means for each of the four dispositions we believe align with being a successful practitioner demonstrates that, indeed, as a whole, each cohort demonstrated growth during its time in the program. In particular, on the final highlighted disposition, Advocating for students and encouraging student self-advocacy while utilizing non-biased assessments Cohorts 1 and 2 showed an increase in their mean ratings of 0.4, while Cohort 3 showed an increase of 0.2. Because of the focus our program places on advocating for all learners, we find this to be particularly validating of the work we do.

Looking at the frequencies of ratings, we are also pleased that, across all three cohorts, only one individual rated themselves a 1 (limited/no evidence), and that was only in the area of commitment to ethical behavior conduct, turning assignments in on time, being punctual and reliable in attendance, and maintaining a professional appearance. Seeing the overall trends in candidates’ ratings towards the 3 (satisfactory evidence) and 4 (exceptional evidence) again highlights the growth in candidates’ dispositions during their time in the program. 

Data Source 3

CSU Educator Quality Center Completer Survey 

Description of Data Source:
Each year, the CSU Educator Quality Center administers a survey to program completers to learn their perceptions of how well the program prepared them in a number of areas aligned with the California Commission on Teacher Credentialing’s Teaching Performance Expectations (TPE). Program completers from all CSU campuses are invited to respond to each item on a 1-5 scale, where 1 indicates they believed that they were “not at all” prepared and 5 indicates they believe they were “very well” prepared.”

Perspective Captured from Data Source: Completer

Rationale for using Data Source:
CSU Educator Quality Center Completer Survey captures program completers’ anonymous perspectives of how well the program prepared them at the conclusion of their teaching credential coursework and field experiences, providing valuable insights into their perceptions of the program.

Specific Elements of Data Source:
Selected items used from the CSU Educator Quality Center Program Completer Survey include:

How well did your program prepare you:

• To evaluate the effects of your actions on student learning and modify your plans accordingly

Definition of Success for Each Element: Programmatically, our goal is for all candidates to indicate they were either “well,” or “very well” prepared once they exit the program

Displays of Analyzed Data 

Figure 4. 2017-2018 CSU Educator Quality Center Completer Responses for Items Related to Self-Evaluation of Professional Practice (n=182)

Figure 5. 2018-2019 CSU Educator Quality Center Completer Responses for Items Related to Self-Evaluation of Professional Practice (n=178)

Figure 6. 2019-2020 CSU Educator Quality Center Completer Responses for Items Related to Self-Evaluation of Professional Practice (n=160)

Link to Full Dataset:

• 2017 EDQ 1F
• 2018 EDQ 1F
• 2019 EDQ 1F

^{Reviewers: If you would like to view the CSU Educator Quality Center Data Dashboards, we are happy to set up a time to provide access by sharing screens in a Zoom session.}

Interpretation of Data:
Of the 183 completers who responded to the 2017-2018 administration of the Educator Quality Center survey (Figure 4), 96% of them indicated they had an overall positive perception of how well prepared they were for gauging the “effects of their actions on student learning and modifying their plans accordingly.” This included 32.80% (n=60) indicating they felt “very well prepared,” 39.30% (n=72) indicating “well prepared,” and 24.00% (n=44) indicating adequately prepared. Of the 177 completers who responded to the 2018-2019 administration of the survey (Figure 5), 95% of them indicated an overall positive perception of how well prepared they were for gauging the “effects of their actions on student learning and modifying their plans accordingly.” This included 39.00% (n=69) indicating they felt “very well prepared,” 36.70% (n=65) indicating “well prepared,” and 19.80% (n=35) indicating adequately prepared. Finally, of the 159 completers who responded to the 2019-2020 administration of the survey (Figure 6), 96% indicated an overall positive perception how well prepared they were for gauging the “effects of their actions on student learning and modifying their plans accordingly.”  This included 40.30% (n=64) indicating they felt “very well prepared,” 37.10% (n=59) indicating “well prepared,” and 18.20% (n=29) indicating adequately prepared. 

Next Steps: 
Looking at the results of the data analysis from all three sources indicates program completers, overall, demonstrate the dispositions and behaviors required to implement successful professional practice evident in all three data sources. And, because data for this standard was represented qualitatively and quantitatively, we were able to survey the depth of understanding of our candidates moving from a conceptual orientation to a numerical analysis of their own professional actions. 

It is interesting to note that the data collected through the Educator Quality Center denoted that most of our candidates felt “well” prepared but not “very well” prepared. In contrast, the data collected from the Pre & Post Dispositional Survey indicated that candidates felt like they had shown significant improvement over time. Similarly, the qualitative data taken from the LEE 156 (displayed in the first data source) course indicated that candidates were developing as reflective practitioners. 

The results from both the qualitative and the quantitative data showed that overall candidates emerged from their courses and their program with the dispositions and behaviors required for successful professional practice. However, it is also reasonable to assume that there needs to be more discussion within the courses regarding the dispositions and behaviors necessary for successful professional practice. Moving forward, the program will increase its collection of qualitative data regarding the dispositions and behaviors that promote a successful practice by addressing the application of a disposition within a class and/or creating an assignment in one of the courses that can be inclusive of one or more of the dispositions. To evaluate our efforts, the program will compare the collected qualitative data with other sets of data sources such as the CTC or EdQ Completer survey at our program meetings.

Top of Page